ACS and EEO Employment Tables

I have been asked to help update our city's EEO report. EEO requirements require that we report out data using the EEO-4 job categories found in section 3 of this web page. This job classification system does not match the one that is used in the current ACS, a more detailed version of which can be found in table S2401. There is also a simplified 6 category system used in many other occupation related ACS tables. I also looked into the 2010 EEO ACS file, which has not been updated as far as I can tell. The EEO file includes tables using a job category classification that is similar to the EEO-4 system, but does not one-to-one.

Has anyone come across a similar data challenge? Were you able to find data that can be compared to EEO-4 or did you not do so? It is unclear to me if that step is a necessary one, since I am unfamiliar with the overall EEO process.

Hi Cliff--
This past spring, I worked on a similar thing. I summarized Census ACS PUMS data into an updated report of metro area civilian workforce composition, by race, gender, and disability -- each of those variabless crosstabulated with EEO-4 job families.

And then our HRIS colleagues are tabulating comparable stats for our own agency.

I built my own correspondence table of what detailed SOC occupations belong in what EEO-4 job families. I can share that crosswalk if helpful.

A tricky aspect of this, Cliff: I think EEO-4 categories may have changed a few years ago. Not sure when exactly. But, specifically, the 5th category (out of 8) may have changed. So if you're using someone else's inherited crosswalk, verify: what is the 5th category. In the current version of EEO-4, it should be "paraprofessionals."

It sounds like you ran into the same issue I am having. I would love to get access to a copy of your crosswalk. I do believe that the fifth category we have is Paraprofessionals, though I will confirm that, so it appears that your work would prove very helpful to us.

I'm curious where you were able to find the information that allowed you to construct the crosswalk. I did find a crosswalk here: www.eeoc.gov/.../00-09opmcode.cfm However, this crosswalk does not include paraprofessionals.

Cliff--
This is the issue that I characterized as tricky. EEO has multiple versions of job families. EEO-FedSec9 (which you pointed to) is different from EE0-4. And I have seen multiple versions of EEO-4 over the past decade!

So when our agency receives notice from the feds that new reporting is needed, I always look at the notice to verify the eight categories being asked for.

If anyone has an authoritative source for a SOC to EEO-4 crosswalk, let us know!

I have done some more investigation and see why you call the question of job classifications tricky. There are a number of systems out there and you have to be careful to find the right one for the right task for the vintage of your data set.

Lacking SAS or a similar tool, I plan to run a query on the IPUMS USA website using the 2012-16 ACS data set to collect data for analysis.

I plan to use the OCC variable to gather data into a table. IPUMS makes a crosswalk available to convert the data into OCCSOC categories - linked from the top of the page here usa.ipums.org/.../acs_occtooccsoc10.shtml The crosswalk covers several different OCCSOC classification schemes. (For unknown reasons, data in unavailable in OCCSOC form from IPUMS USA despite indications to the contrary in the IPUMS data dictionary.)

My question for you is do you know which OCCSOC classification you used when creating the crosswalk between occupation codes and the SOC classification?

We are aware that the 5th category does not match. The respective federal agency who requested the table is aware of this issue, and hopefully plans to update it for the next Tab which is planned to be released 2021.

52. In preparing a workforce chart for the EEOP Utilization Report, how does a recipient that is a state or local government agency decide which of the eight major job categories used in the EEO Tabulation 2006-2010 (5-year ACS data) is the appropriate classification for a particular job title?

In preparing a workforce chart for an EEOP Utilization Report, a recipient may need to reclassify some jobs in its workforce to correspond with the revised job categories used in the EEO Tabulation 2006-2010 (5-year ACS data). For example, to reclassify jobs that were previously classified as Para-Professional, a category that no longer exists, or to reclassify jobs previously designated as simply Protective Services (instead of the new categories of Protective Services Sworn and Protective Services Non-Sworn), one should use the job classifications listed on the U.S. Census Bureau's web site. To access the information from the website, locate the third line from the top of the page, click on the underlined words "State and Local Occupation Groups." The link will lead to the file Occupational Crosswalk to State and Local Government Job Categories. Scrolling downward, find particular job titles listed in the Category Title column, and on the same line for each job title, in the far right column, there is a number that corresponds to one of the eight job categories in the EEO Tabulation 2006-2010 (5-year ACS data) (i.e., one (1) for Officials and Managers, two (2) for Professionals, three (3) for Technicians, four (4) for Protective Services: Sworn, five (5) for Protective Services: Non-sworn, six (6) for Administrative Support, seven (7) for Skilled Craft, and eight (8) for Service Maintenance).

The person who can answer that question is out of town until late next week, so I will have to wait until then to find out. We have been using a EEO-4 classification with the paraprofessional category, so there could be a federal requirement or it could be the state mirroring the federal requirement.

Were you able to determine which OCCSOC classification you used when creating the crosswalk between occupation codes and the SOC classification? I this may relate to what version of the ACS you used for your source data.